Using some embarrassingly bad reasoning, self-serving lies, and inertia—the way we make all decisions as a society. We will devote unreasonable amount of resources to risks that aren’t serious, and stay entirely unaware of the most dangerous risks. No matter which decision procedure we’ll take—this will be the result.
What evasions? I thought I’ve clearly stated that I view your decision procedure as pretty much “make up a bunch of random number, multiply and compare”.
Improvement would be to skip this rationality theater and admit we don’t have a clue.
Using some embarrassingly bad reasoning, self-serving lies, and inertia—the way we make all decisions as a society. We will devote unreasonable amount of resources to risks that aren’t serious, and stay entirely unaware of the most dangerous risks. No matter which decision procedure we’ll take—this will be the result.
It is clear from your repeated evasions that you have no proposal to improve on the decision procedure I propose.
What evasions? I thought I’ve clearly stated that I view your decision procedure as pretty much “make up a bunch of random number, multiply and compare”.
Improvement would be to skip this rationality theater and admit we don’t have a clue.
AND THEN DECIDE HOW?
By tossing a coin or using Ouija board? None of alternatives proposed has better track record.